Content
86%Weight 40%Scale 1-5Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The body is well-structured, actionable, and sequence-clear with concrete code, paths, and a checklist, plus an honest account of the unautomated removal gap. The only modest slack is in conciseness and a couple of workflow checkpoints.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Mostly lean and assumes Claude's TS/React/feature-flag knowledge; each explanatory sentence (dismissKey reasoning, the stale-removal gap) earns its place, with only minor instances that could be trimmed, so it sits above 3 but short of the fully-lean 5 anchor. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Provides concrete, copy-paste-ready TS/TSX (predicate signature, flag constant, full component), exact file paths, a copy example, and a named test model, covering the common cases fully executably. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Clear sequence — the four-gate narrowing test, the five-piece pattern, and a checklist — with an explicit testing/validation checkpoint (predicate tested both ways) and an honest removal workflow; minor gaps keep it just below the explicit feedback-loop 5 anchor. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | No bundle files exist; the single ~130-line body is well-organized into clear sections and cross-skill references (/writing-user-facing-copy, /cleaning-up-stale-feature-flags, /writing-tests) are one level deep and clearly signaled, meeting the simple-skills well-organized exception. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 18 / 20 Passed |